Re: '94 Q45 / '89 200q comparison...U.S. only!

[MSV96 <MSV96@aol.com>]

In a message dated 98-03-20 16:19:27 EST, you write:

<< I don't follow the logic here.  The original claim was in terms of
 performance. >>

I attempted to keep this a friendly off line discussion to avoid wasting q-
list BW. I'll try to keep this reply short (me? yeah right). The thing I think
we seem to disagree on is the term "performance". I base my perception of that
term mostly on real world driving conditions, not so much lap times and test
reports. Much more subjective I admit...but IMO fits the real world better
since that is where I do 99% of my driving. FWIW, certain hot models aside (M3
and 540i), US Audis are pretty much on par with comparable wmb's in specified
performance. Beyond that are the subjective things...

In motorsports there are sayings like "it's a good race car" made about cars
that don't qualify well but win races. That kind of comparison is kinda like
what I'm saying here. While in testing or at track events car A may be faster
than car B (going away from brand names) yet maybe to some people car B
actualy does a better overall job for their performance requirements.

Bottom line is this...it's not all just numbers from road tests that make up
the whole picture of performance. Some of that picture comes into focus on a
personal and subjective basis. From that aspect it doesn't sound as if we are
likely to agree on what defines "performance".

Mike Veglia
87 5kcstq
and very many cars gone but not fogotten form many brands, including a few
wmb's